About the time that Mr. How ard was engaged in these interesting researches, and before he had published the result of them, M. Vauquelin happened also to be occupied with the very same subject. He analyzed, though by a different process, the Benares stone, and two others which fell in 1789 and 1790 in the south of France. The results of his experiments agreed with those of our distinguished countryman in every particular; and we are now entitled to conclude, with perfect confidence, that the stones, that have at different times fallen upon the earth, in England, France, Italy, and the EastIndies, are precisely of the same nature, consisting of the same simple substances, arranged in similar compounds, nearly in the same proportions, and combined in the same manner, so as to form heterogeneous aggregate whose general resemblance to each other is complete. We are further warranted in another important inference, that no other bodies have as yet been discovered on our globe, which contain the same ingredients; and, more particularly, that the analysis of these stones has made us acquainted with a species of pyrites not formerly known, nor any where else to be found.

The general analogy between these stones and the masses of native iron found in different parts of the world, was too striking to escape the eminent inquirers who have investigated this subject. They resemble each other in their external character, though not by any means so closely as the stones: but in one circumstance of their chemical composition they have a remarkable similarity, both among themselves, and towards the stony substances. M. Proust, a considerable time before the date of Mr.

Howard's discoveries, had proved that the enormous mass of native iron found in South America, contained a large portion of nickel in its composition. Mr. Howard was led to the same conclusion by analyzing another portion of this body; and he found that the solitary masses discovered in Siberia, Bohemia, and Senegal, contained a mixture of the same metal with iron,though in various proportions. The Bohemian iron is an alloy, of which nickel forms eighteen parts in the hundred; in the Siberian iron, it forms seventeen; and in the Senegal iron, five or six. But what is still more striking, and tends to place the similarity of their origin beyond all doubt, the Siberian mass is interspersed with cavities, containing an earthy substance of the very same nature, as the earthy cement and globules of the Benares stone; nay, the pro portions of the ingredients, according to Mr. Howard's analysis, are nearly alike, if we except that of the oxide of iron, which is considerably smaller in the Siberian earth. This curious fact excites the strongest prepossession in favour of the idea, that the Siberian iron owes its origin to the same causes, which formed and projected the different stones supposed to have fallen on the earth and, coupled with the other details of the analysis, it naturally leads us to conclude, that the masses of native iron, as they are called, differ in no respect from the metallick particles, or the alloy of iron and nickel, which constitute one of the four aggregate parts in every stone hitherto examined.

It may be remarked, that, excepting the tradition of the Tartars respecting the fall of the Siberian iron from heaven, no external evidence has been preserved to illus

trate the origin of those masses of native metal which have been analyzed by chemists. A tolerably authentick testimony has, however, been lately found to prove the fall of a similar body in the East-Indies. Mr. Greville has communicated to the Royal Society (Phil. Trans. 1803, pt. I.), a very interesting document, translated from the Emperour Jehangire's Memoirs of his own reign. The prince relates, that in the year 1620 (of our ara), a violent explosion was heard at a village in the Punjaub, and, during the noise, a luminous body fell from above on the earth. That the aumil (or fiscal officer) of the district immediately repaired to the spot where the body was said to have fallen, and finding the ground still hot and burnt up, caused it to be dug; when the heat increasing, he at last came to a lump of iron violently hot; that this was sent to the court, where the Emperour had it weighed in his presence, and ordered it to be forged into a sabre, a knife, and a dagger; that the workman reported it was not malleable, but shivered under the stroke; and that it required to be mixed up with one third part of common iron, when the mass was found to make excellent blades. The Royal historian adds, that upon the incident of this iron of lightning being manufactured, a poet presented him with a distich, purporting that, during his reign, the earth attained order and regularity; that raw iron fell from lightning, and was, by his worldsubduing authority, converted into a dagger, a knife, and two sabres.'

The exact resemblance of the occurrence here related, in all its essential circumstances, to the accounts of fallen stones formerly detailed, and the particular observation upon the unmalleable nature

of the iron, give, it must be confessed, a very great degree of credibility to the whole narrative, and bestow additional weight on the inference previously drawn from internal evidence, that the solitary masses of native iron, found in different quarters of the globe; have the same origin with the stones analyzed by Vauquelin and Howard.

We have now gone through the whole evidence, both with respect to the circumstances in which these singular bodies are found, the ingredients of which they are compounded, and the outward appearance and structure which they exhibit: we are now to consider the inferences respecting their probable origin, which this mass of information may warrant us to draw.

Independent of the distinct negative which the external evidence gives to any such conclusions, we are fully entitled to deny that these bodies are formed in the ground by lightning, or existed previously there, both from their exact resemblance to each other in whatev-, er part of the earth they have been found, and from their containing substances no where else to be met with. It cannot surely be imagined, that exactly in those spots where fire, of some unknown kind, precipitated from an exploded meteor, happened to fall, there should exist certain proportions of iron, sulphur, nickel, magnesia and silica, ready to be united by the heat or electricity. Still, less conceivable is it, that, in every such fall of fire, those ingredients should first combine, by twos and threes, in the very same manner, and then that the binary and ternary compounds should unite in similar aggregates. But, least of all is it reasonable to

suppose, that bodies

formed in the carth should, upon being dug up, be found enveloped in a crust different from the rest of their substance, and bearing evident marks of having undergone the action of heat in contact with the air.

The same unquestionable resemblance which prevails among all these bodies, and, still more, the peculiar nature of the pyrites which they contain, prove very clearly that they have not a volcanick origin. Even if such an hypothesis were liable to no other objection, it would be inadmissible on this ground, that we know of no volcano that throws up so small a portion of matter, and so uniformly of the same kind. But though we were to admit the existence of this volcano, where must we place it, that its eruptions may extend from Bengal to England, France, Italy, and Bohemia; nay, from Siberia to Senegal and South-America? And if we are forced to admit the existence of a series of such volcanoes, which are known to us only by these peculiar effects of their eruptions, do we not acknowledge that we are compelled to imagine a set of causes, without any other foundation for our belief in them, than our occasion for their assistance in explaining the phenomenon? In short do we not account for one difficulty, by fancying a greater? But if it is alleged that the stones come from volcanoes already known, we demand, what volcano exists in the peninsula of India, or in England, or in France, or in Bohemia? And if it is said that these bodies are projected by Hecla, Etna, &c. to all manner of distances, we must ask, whether this is not explaining what is puzzling, by assuming what is impossible? It is surely much better

to rest satisfied with recording the fact, and leaving it under all its difficulties,than to increase its wonders by the addition of a miracle.

The same remark may be extended to those, who have fancied that the constituent parts of the stones exist in the atmosphere, and are united by the fire of a meteor, or by the electrick fluid. We have no right to make any such hypothesis. We have never seen iron, silica, &c. in the gaseous state. These bodies may, for ought we know, be compounds of oxygen and azote or hydrogen, &c.; but as yet we have no reason to think so. Besides, he who amuses us with this clumsy and gratuitous explication, will probably account for every other phenomenon by a similar process of creation: He may, with equal plausibility, conceive the earth to be formed by a union of burnt gases, and then cover it with vegetables, and people it with living creatures, by a few more conflagrations and explosions. Such, however, is the theory most heavily expounded by M. Izarn-spun, with tiresome and unprofitable industry, into cobwebs, which touch every fact, without catching itand enveloping in the mist of general logical positions, which faintly conceal the fundamental postulate-an entire act of creation.

From the whole, we may safely infer, that the bodies in question have fallen on the surface of the earth, but that they were not projected by any volcanoes, and that we have no right, from the known laws of nature, to suppose that they were formed in the upper regions of the atmosphere. Such a negative conclusion seems all that we are, in the present state of our knowledge, entitled to draw. But an hypothesis may perhaps suggest itself, unincumbered by any

of the foregoing difficulties, if we attend to the following undoubted truths.

As the attraction of gravitation extends over the whole planetary system, a heavy body, placed at the surface of the Moon, is affect ed chiefly by two forces; one drawing it towards the centre of the Earth, and another drawing it towards that of the Moon. The latter of these forces, however, is beyond all comparison greatest at or near the Moon's surface. But as we recede from the Moon, and approach to the Earth,this force decreases, while the other augments; and at one point between the two planets, these forces are exactly equal—so that a heavy body, placed there, must remain at rest. If, therefore, a body is projected from the Moon towards the Earth, with a force sufficient to carry it beyond this point of equal attraction, it must necessarily fall on the Earth. Nor would it require a very great impulse to throw the body within the sphere of the Earth's superiour attraction. Supposing the line of projection to be that which joins the centres of the two planets, and supposing them to remain at rest; it has been demonstrated, on the Newtonian estimation of the Moon's mass, that a force of projection moving the body 12,000 feet in a second, would entirely detach it from the Moon and throw it upon the Earth. This estimate of the Moon's mass is, however, now admitted to be much greater than the truth; and upon M. De la Place's calculation, it has been shewn that a force of little more than one half the above power would be sufficient to produce the effect. A projectile, then, moving from the Moon with a velocity about three times greater than that of a cannon ball, Vol. V. No. 1.

C

would infallibly reach the earth; and there can be little doubt that such forces are exerted by volcanoes during eruptions, as well as by the production of steam, from subterranean heat. We may easi ly imagine such cause of motion to exist in the Moon, as well as in the Earth. Indeed, several obser vations have rendered the existence of volcanoes there extremely probable. In the calculation just now referred to, we may remark, that no, allowance is made for the resistance of any medium in the place where the motion is generated. In fact, we have every reason to believe, from optical considerations, that the moon has no atmosphere.

A body falling from the Moon upon the Earth, after being impelled by such a force as we have been describing, would not reach us in less than two days and a half. It would enter our atmosphere with a velocity of nearly 25,000 feet in a second; but the resistance of the air increasing with the velocity, would soon greatly reduce it, and render it uniform. We may remark, however, that all the accounts of fallen stones agree in attributing to the luminous bodies a rapid motion in the air, and the effects of a very considerable momentum to the fragments which reach the ground. The oblique direction in which they always fall, must tend ̄greatly to diminish their penetrating power.

While we are investigating the circumstances that render this account of the matter highly probable, we ought not to admit one consideration, which lies wholly in the opposite scale. The greater part of these singular bodies have first appeared in a high state of ignition; and it does not seem ea